Indiana vs. Wisconsin: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
IUTeam statsWIS
- Q3 0:21WISCollin Larsh 28 Yd Field Goal 14–6
- Q3 11:03IUWhop Philyor 7 Yd pass from Jack Tuttle (Charles Campbell Kick)14–3
- Q2 4:03WISCollin Larsh 29 Yd Field Goal 7–3
- Q2 11:03IUPeyton Hendershot 1 Yd pass from Jack Tuttle (Charles Campbell Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassJack Tuttle 13/22, 130 YDS, 2 TD
- RushStevie Scott 18 CAR, 57 YDS
- RecWhop Philyor 4 REC, 47 YDS, 1 TD
- PassGraham Mertz 20/34, 202 YDS, 1 INT
- RushJalen Berger 15 CAR, 87 YDS
- RecJake Ferguson 5 REC, 54 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsIU up 8 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,588 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 11:03IU +26%
Jack Tuttle pass complete to Whop Philyor for 7 yds for a TD (Charles Campbell KICK)
- Q4 5:50IU +23%
Stevie Scott III run for no gain to the Ind 41
- Q2 11:03IU +20%
Jack Tuttle pass complete to Peyton Hendershot for 1 yd for a TD (Charles Campbell KICK)
- Q3 0:15IU +15%
Stevie Scott III run for 3 yds to the Ind 28
- Q3 0:21WIS +11%
Collin Larsh 28 yd FG GOOD
- Q4 4:40WIS +10%
Graham Mertz pass complete to A.J. Abbott for 9 yds to the Wisc 17
FAQ
What was the final score of Indiana vs. Wisconsin?
Indiana 14, Wisconsin 6.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked WIS, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| IU | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| 217 | Total yards | 342 |
| 130 | Passing yards | 202 |
| 87 | Rushing yards | 140 |
| 15 | First downs | 19 |
| 4-10 | 3rd down | 8-16 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 0-1 |
| 13/22 | Comp/Att | 20/34 |
| 5.9 | Yards per pass | 5.9 |
| 2.8 | Yards per rush | 4.0 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 1-15 | Penalties | 8-81 |
| 24:52 | Possession | 35:08 |
Costliest call
Q1 10:35 WIS punt on 4th & 3 at IU 44. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.96 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q3 0:21WISCollin Larsh 28 Yd Field Goal 14–6
- Q3 11:03IUWhop Philyor 7 Yd pass from Jack Tuttle (Charles Campbell Kick)14–3
- Q2 4:03WISCollin Larsh 29 Yd Field Goal 7–3
- Q2 11:03IUPeyton Hendershot 1 Yd pass from Jack Tuttle (Charles Campbell Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (WIS Elo 1949, IU Elo 1703 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects WIS -12.2 (80% to win), essentially in line with the market.
Why that percentage is worth reading: across 604 graded in-season games, the calls this model put near 58% came in at 58.2%. The full calibration table is published, bin by bin. Early in the season the cold-start path runs instead and calibrates less well (Brier 0.2028 against 0.1889).
Model as of Sep 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2020
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#43 of 97 in 2020 by biggest miss · #21 of 107 in 2020 by longest odds.
The 2020 upset archive →Wisconsin leads 41–21–2 · Indiana has won 3 straight · 38% have been one-possession games
| IU | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| -3.5 (#77) | CORE overall | +3.9 (#48) |
| -9 / -5 | offense / defense | -8 / -12 |
| 2.33 | points / drive | 1.89 |
| 1.58 | allowed / drive | 1.38 |
| 23% | three-and-outs | 24% |
| +8 | pass over expected | -3 |
Bold is the side ahead. CORE strips the situation from every play and solves the schedule out across the league, so these compare two teams that never met.
Key matchups
The analyst read: each team's offense splits crossed against the opponent's defense, with the edges called out.
Create a free account →You get Pro free for 6 months. No card required.
Where this number comes from. Every projection on this page is produced by the same model, run before kickoff on opponent-adjusted efficiency, power ratings and situational data — walk-forward validated on eleven seasons and never adjusted after the fact. How the model works →